Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Alain Soral reacts to Aymeric Chauprade

"Philosopher" Alain Soral has become famous primarily for his hatred of Jews, Israel and America; his friendship with humorist Dieudonné; and his connection in 2007 to the presidential campaign of the Front National. A Marxist, who claims he has renounced Marxism, but who interprets events in terms of class struggle, he advised Marine Le Pen to run a campaign based on inclusiveness, using posters showing presidential candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen smiling broadly while holding hands with children of many hues, in a misbegotten attempt to turn the FN into a party of multiculturalism and economic egalitarianism. The campaign was a disaster; Le Pen did not even get ten percent of the vote; Marine Le Pen was held accountable for the loss; she and Soral went their separate ways (or so we thought). He was from 2007 to 2009 a member of the FN.

Soral's ideology consists of a mixture of right-wing morality (for example he claims he is against homosexual marriage, and he has written extensively against feminism) and left-wing socialism, brewed together with a large dose of Jew-hatred, anti-capitalism, and anti-Americanism. He cleverly mixes his dislike of female immorality with his preference for Islam, saying for example that he prefers the Islamic veil to the thongs worn by today's young girls.

The following excerpt on feminism (from Wikipedia) is good example of how one could be fooled into thinking Soral had valuable insights:

 - Alain Soral argues that women have always worked (in trade or agriculture, for example). To him, feminism was invented by tiring of their role as mothers. Soral distinguishes two types of feminism: that of the "flippées" ("freaked-out") such as Simone de Beauvoir, and that of the "pétasses" ("bitches") like Élisabeth Badinter. Soral claims that the most problematic inequality is not between men and women, but between rich and poor, and that feminists, who generally come from the upper classes of society, attempt to distract attention from this struggle.

(He is not entirely wrong. It was the wealthy pampered feminists, who are all leftists, who influenced women of lesser means, and helped to destroy the family unit that holds society together.)

In another mix-up he claims that Islam is not a threat but is exploited by capitalists so they can plunder Muslim countries.

Whether he deliberately mixes ideologies in order to appear to have a comprehensive world-view, or is so shackled to Marxism that he cannot see beyond the wall he has built around himself no one can say. But my strong feeling is that Alain Soral is to be avoided at all costs, and it will always be to Marine Le Pen's detriment that she entertained the notion of using his services.

He is still giving advice to the Front National as head of a "think tank" called Égalité et Réconciliation. Below, wearing a "goy" tee-shirt, he lashes out vituperatively at Aymeric Chauprade, who recently posted an eight-part manifesto urging France to stop immigration, to cease regarding Israel as an enemy, and to take measures to protect the country from Sunni Muslim violence. Many of you read my translation of this document. (Note that two commercials precede the main feature.)

 - I think Chauprade hired a lawyer because I called him a son of a b… Now, before the camera, Chauprade, you're a son of a b… You organized a dinner in order to meet me and tell me that you were 100% in agreement with me and that you wanted to be elected deputy (in the EU Parliament) for the Front National in order to infuse the FN with a foreign policy that was intelligent and really patriotic. We (meaning Égalité et Réconciliation) helped you get elected, we posted tracts for you in Saint-Denis. Chauprade was elected in the districts where we have a great deal of influence. Then in August, behind everyone's back, including the Front National's, he produced a text on submission to Zionism and on support for the notion of a clash of civilizations. It's a total betrayal of his own ideas that he has been expressing for years. He was removed from the Defense Ministry because he dissented from the official version on 9/11. The whole implementation of the clash of civilizations, in practical terms, after the neo-conservative theories, is 9/11. Until the day before yesterday Chauprade produced analyses that invalidate his current position. We must consider this to be high treason. Normally when a guy is elected and does not keep his promises he is removed from office and from the party. Not only did he betray the promises he made to us at that dinner - when he said "Soral is one of us" - you can also see a video from 2012.

Note: The following passage from a 2012 video are words uttered by Aymeric Chauprade:

"Logically there is someone who ought to be happy this evening, that is Alain Soral. Someone who has understood completely the profound forces of history, the ones that our good 'bourgeois Westerner' refuses to see, so blinded is he by the red flags that the 'main stream media' waves in his face. So listen to him and read him. We do not necessarily use the same words (so much the better) but our thoughts are in harmony. Aymeric Chauprade, March 5, 2012."

Note: The "red flags" seem to refer to provocative news stories that distract the viewer from thinking about things of greater substance. The French expression originates in bullfighting. I am guessing at its meaning.

Returning to Alain Soral:

He totally betrayed me. He is putting me in danger because we campaigned for him. If the people who voted for him, who voted for the FN: Muslims, Muslim patriots, people who have confidence in me, if they think that I am his accomplice, this piece of garbage called Chauprade puts me in danger of death, because if I were such a bastard I would deserve to be punished. And so I say "Chauprade you're a son of a b…" I would like to see you face to face. You're a traitor to your own ideas, and you create problems for the Front National insinuating privately that you have seduced Marine Le Pen and that you are her lover, which is scandalous. At a dinner with people you are trying to manipulate you claim to be 'national socialist' and they have to calm you …. (passage not clear). It's not over, we have to work until he's removed from the FN, and if he's not removed, and I say this clearly, Chauprade is responsible for Égalité et Réconciliation separating itself completely from the Front National and going on its own as a political party. Enough is enough. Do not vote for the Front National. We haven't finished with this guy whom I took for someone serious, who's just a piss-ass with spectacles and a briefcase, dreaming of starting wars with a map and toy soldiers in front of him. Chauprade, you haven't heard the last from me.

Soral is an attention-seeking hothead. A failed writer, a failed movie-maker, a failed political advisor, he has only Dieudonné and the Muslims on his side, except for those drawn to him for his Marxist beliefs, his desire to see France become part of the Caliphate, and his renegade appearance.

However, it is possible he helped get Chauprade elected by convincing Muslim voters that the FN was antisemitic. If this is true, Soral is unhinged, or he's getting even with the FN for having him removed as a member of the central committee. 

As for Chauprade, my feeling is still "wait and see". I know nothing of his private life. I only know his manifesto marked a surprising change from the usual political platforms, especially his recognition that deportation of Muslims is not out of the question. A reminder that he was fired from the Defense Ministry for suggesting that Bush and Mossad planned the 9/11 attacks in order to start a war against Muslims. His recent manifesto took a much more guarded approach, saying that the attacks were probably the result of a collaboration between two "deep states", the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, a slight improvement, but not much.  Either Chauprade is sincerely modifying his earlier views or he is, as some claim, an opportunist. At any rate, he sounds good. 

Chauprade answers Soral in a fifteen-minute video (below) for French readers that is too long to translate now. In the video he remains very calm and justifies his manifesto saying that he tried to be balanced and above all realistic about what can be accomplished. He says that those that seek a perfect society will never rule.

Original source: François Desouche

Labels: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

The changing face of Britain

This chart was posted at François Desouche. Once again I feel it's necessary to write about England because what is happening there is proof positive that Western civilization has not only reached a crossroad, it has taken the road it never traveled by in the past two thousand years - that of spineless capitulation to an enemy who has used psychological warfare to conquer us. The physical crimes alone should have been enough to awaken people to the danger, but the fear of being called a racist, and the dread of being an outcast, without friends, at war with one's own family, and possibly without a livelihood, has made cowards of us all. If we could get over the fear, we could fight back, but we need leaders for that. We do not have the moral fiber to take things into our own hands, and I would not know what to suggest, other than blood in the streets with any weapons you can get your hands on. (Or put intense pressure on the leaders, relentless pressure, in the streets and elsewhere - turn off the television, vote for the most patriotic politicians you can find, and do it now.)

Labels: , , ,

Friday, September 12, 2014

Femen acquitted, guards fined

Some of you remember the Femen. Or perhaps you prefer to forget. The bare-breasted exhibitionists who are paid to invade churches, private offices, and pro-Catholic demonstrations with lewd messages of hatred painted on their breasts, made headlines during the pro-family, anti-Taubira demonstrations in 2012 and 2013.

Le Parisien reminds us of what transpired in February 2013, when they stormed into Notre-Dame cathedral:

On February 12, 2013, the Femen celebrated in their own way the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. Incognito in the crowd of tourists, they had entered the building, removed their coats and sprawled out on three bells temporarily on display in the nave for the 850th anniversary of Notre-Dame de Paris.

Showing off their breasts, as they customarily do, they shouted "Pope no more", hitting the bells with pieces of wood.

In their report, the police had noted nicks a centimeter long on the top of the Marcel bell (named for Saint Marcel). During the trial the Femen denied having caused the damage, arguing that they had taken the trouble to cover the wood with felt. The lawyer for the priest of Notre-Dame said the protective felt was not attached properly and the bell was struck with "bare wood".

Now we have the result of the trial:

For want of proof they were not convicted. The nine members of the Femen, accused of damaging a bell in Notre-Dame cathedral, were acquitted on Wednesday by the criminal court of Paris. However, three cathedral guards were sentenced to suspended fines of three hundred, five hundred and one thousand euros, for committing violence to the militant women when they were being expelled from the cathedral.

Note: Several Le Parisien readers noted that proof was self-evident since the scene had been witnessed and filmed.

The prosecution has appealed.

The court's decision angered Catholic politician Christine Boutin, founder of the Christian Democrat Party, who exclaimed on Twitter: 

"Femen acquitted, guards convicted! The right to blasphemy! Shame and provocation! France ridiculed!"

Marine Le Pen's niece, Marion Maréchal Le Pen (left), recently married and expecting a child, also reacted to the verdict:

(…) With a minister of Justice (i.e., Christiane Taubira) who has sworn to destroy France in its foundations and its soul, and who is supported in her plans by a militant magistrates' union, anything is possible when it comes to insulting the Catholic religion, desecrating places of worship, and damaging national property. Even exhibitionism, a fully condemnable act, was not held against them. In France all religions are protected except, it seems, the historic religion of the French people. In this affair, they didn't even speak of desecration, only of damage…

Top, the Femen ply their trade.

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, September 11, 2014

France delays delivery of warships

The French government has delayed the delivery of one helicopter carrier, the Vlodivostok, and suspended the delivery of two Mistral amphibious assault ships to Russia. François Hollande presumably caved in to pressure from the United States, now engaged in a type of "cold war" with Russia over Ukraine and unwilling to see the Russians gain any advantage in the form of French battle ships (ordered long ago). That François Hollande would place a desire to please the United States over his duty to promote French industry and his commitment to Russia has aroused indignation from former presidential candidate and former president of the General Council of la Vendée, Philippe de Villiers (seen above with Putin). Many who had a major stake in the building and delivery of these ships have also demonstrated against the government's delay tactics. On the opposing side, however, are those who protest the delivery of the ships lest they be used in the war against the Ukrainians.

The following article is from Presse Ocean, a local paper from Saint-Nazaire where the ships were built:

In a communiqué, Philippe de Villiers, president of the Mouvement Pour la France (his political party), expressed the belief that "if François Hollande were to delay the delivery of the first Mistral type amphibious assault ship, he would be committing an act of treason vis-à-vis France, and he would be committing three serious errors. First, François Hollande would force France to betray her word and her signature, which would discredit our country in the eyes of the entire world, and weaken our defense industry by putting major contracts such as the plan to sell Rafales to India in jeopardy. The Indians are today wondering if our country can be taken seriously and if it has the ability to respect its commitments… Second, François Hollande would be committing this absurd and serious act at the very moment when, despite American pressure and the total submission of Europe to the Atlantiste position, Porochenko and Vladimir Putin are in the process of working out an agreement for a cease-fire that should be signed on Friday (September 5) and that opens the way to a diplomatic and political solution to the crisis!

Note: The term "Atlantiste" refers to all economic, agricultural, military deals, commitments, and exchanges between Europe and America. French patriots, with the exception of some businessmen, are opposed to any collaboration with America that is detrimental to the French economy and to French culture, and Marine Le Pen has made anti-Atlantisme one of the foundations of her platform. It was to avoid domination by America that Marine Le Pen turned to Russia in the first place.

Villiers concludes:

Finally, besides the thousand jobs linked to the Mistral contracts that are now in danger from such a decision, it is all of French industry in Moscow that would be at risk, at the very moment when our industry has succeeded in developing durable activities in Russia in a climate of trust, creating in the 1200 French companies on Russian territory almost 100,000 indirect jobs in France, generated by France's Russian projects. If François Hollande's popularity rating last week was less than 20%, his successive errors and the incompetence he demonstrates ought to lead him to the obvious conclusion of his failure: François Hollande must resign.

This story is online in English at numerous websites. 

The latest poll at Le Figaro shows that 62% of the French would like François Hollande to resign, but 61% think he'll stick it out to the end.

Labels: , , , ,

In review

From the thousands of videos available I came upon these four while browsing for something relevant to post on September 11, 2014. They may not be the best, and they may already be familiar to you, but the messages are worth repeating: jihad is resurgent, Iraq is devastated, France and England are in extreme danger. Nobody is doing anything.

In this video from Vice News we see scenes from inside Iraq as the Islamic State takes over:

A familiar face, Raymond Ibrahim, talks about the meaning of the Caliphate:

The Christian channel CBN discusses the Islamization of France (from April 2014). I believe I already posted this video or one very similar:

From 2013, this video denounces the gangs of sex offenders that run riot with impunity in Britain.

Finally, thanks to TL Winslow for his link to my translation of Aymeric Chauprade. TL's blog Historyscoper is so full of links that I'll let you choose. He has a second blog (apparently the first one was removed by Google then restored) also bursting with links to articles of interest about Islam in America. He builds both blogs around links to a massive amount of material on every conceivable aspect of Islam, and reports the staggering number of daily incidents and events that make up the sinister tableau of Western capitulation.

Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, September 09, 2014

The Rape of Britain

To talk about the rampage of child rapes in Britain at this late date is taking coals to Newcastle. Most of you probably kept up with the story. Several readers sent me links to the Rotherham tale of horror that was finally revealed to the world in August (although there had been earlier reports in 2011 and 2012): a frenzy of violence that had been going on for more than two decades without so much as a flicker of retaliation from the British authorities. Here are two links to the Daily Mail and The Telegraph.

A reader also sent a link to the report on the "grooming gangs", the gangs that prepared the girls for their new life as slave and prostitute. The long report, entitled Easy Meat: Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery, is in pdf format and could have been entitled "Barbary Coast atrocities revisited." I suggest you download it and read it at leisure. So far I have only skimmed through it. Here is a short passage from the introduction:

The sexual abuse of children takes different social forms: from sporadic child abductions, to organised child pornography rings, to abuse by parents or care-home staff. All of it is awful, and none of it should be ignored. The phenomenon of gangs of men who loiter with impunity around schoolgirls, luring them into a life of addiction and

There are some specific features and events which should have made it obvious to the authorities and the media that a new social phenomenon was occurring in Britain. What should have been of interest to the authorities?
∙ gangs of Muslim men hanging around school gates in cars
∙ schoolgirls contacting police and social services and telling them that they had been abused
∙ parents contacting police and social services with their fears and accumulated evidence
∙ extended families of Muslim men being associated with this child abuse
∙ schoolgirls being abducted or going missing for days on end
∙ stories of the men luring the girls with gifts, then turning them into addicts
∙ families having to abandon their daughters to stop the daughter luring other relatives into the clutches of the gangs
∙ connections between the grooming gangs and drug dealers

What should have been of interest to the media and academics?
∙ gang violence between Sikhs and Muslims over claims about grooming
∙ Sikhs creating organisations to teach their girls what the gangs were doing
∙ reports that devout Muslim organisations were instructing Muslim men to deceive and subjugate non-Muslim women
∙ refusal of the Muslim community to condemn these crimes and their failure to inform police that they were going on
∙ international parallels between this phenomenon in Britain and its occurrence in the Netherlands

Between 1988 and 2003, evidence of all of these things must have been known by many police officers, social workers, academics and journalists. Yet we will show that, with very few exceptions, these incidents were rarely publicised in the national media, by the campaigns of child-care charities, by official reports, or in academic
books. On the rare occasion when the phenomenon would be discussed in more than the briefest details, political activists and the authorities would come together to stop the public from knowing more. Political correctness would be used to make sure that people did not speak about this phenomenon, enabling the perpetrators free rein to sexually abuse schoolgirls for decades. Yes, decades. We know that in an age where parents are not allowed to smack their children, this sounds unbelievable. But finally, by 2011 the conspiracy of silence was broken. And in September 2012, The Times newspaper carried an extensive overview of what had been going on. It stated that “for more than a decade organised groups of men were able to groom, pimp and traffic girls across the country with virtual impunity.” The Times went on to quote a welfare expert describing this as “the biggest child protection scandal of our time.” We will show that even the coverage in The Times has understated the scale of the problem. There is far more to this story than has come out so far. The population are already outraged by what they have learned in the last year or two, but know only a fraction of the scandal.

For those interested there is an article at PJ Media by Robert Spencer in which he lists fourteen persons and groups who through their collaboration, cowardice or opportunism led Britain to perdition. The Luftwaffe could not have done better.

For the record here's a link to another article at Breitbart.

For French readers: Using Google France I did a search on Rotherham and came up with only one substantial article at François Desouche. Apparently, the French news sources have not yet shown any interest in the story.

Top, a tract from the Rotherham Diversity Forum. While the do-gooders were thinking "positive" young girls were being subjected to unspeakable acts of brutality by "Asian" gangs. 

Below, some of the Rotherham rapists:

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, September 08, 2014

Islamists in the Front National?

Are there Islamists in the Front National - true Islamists who obey sharia law and place the requirements of their religion above all else? There was at least one. He claims he is no longer a member and that he has freed himself from his duties to the collective called Marianne, where he was secretary since March 2014. The collective Marianne is allied with the Rassemblement Bleu Marine (RBM), Marine Le Pen's coalition party that runs in legislative and European elections.

His name is Yacine Zerkoun (above) and recently he posted an article at Boulevard Voltaire in which he claims Islam is the religion of forgiveness:

(…) They often say, out of derision, that Islam is a religion of love. I don't believe that. One has only to read the first verse of each sura to realize that Islam is not a religion of love but of forgiveness. "In the name of God, the All-Merciful, the Very-Merciful". We were created in the image of the Lord, we must, therefore, resemble Him as much as possible. The first thing we must imitate is forgiveness. (…)

His defense of Islam was denounced in an article by Jérôme Cortier, writing at Riposte Laïque. Cortier says:

(…) And then there is the disconcertingly inane article by Yacine Zerkoun, the Mohammedan secretary of the Marianne/RBM collective (sic). Published by Boulevard Voltaire, this editorial by a former contributor to the Islamist website presents Islam as a religion of forgiveness. At a time when Christians are being massacred by Muslims rigorous enough to follow the Koran to the letter, this anti-secular ode comes as a provocation infested with the usual Islamist naïveté, an irritating plague of medieval thoughts. "It's unbelievable that such a person could represent the FN," cried out the commenters at the most patriotic forums. Even the UMP wouldn't dream of pushing ethnic cynicism this far. The entire galaxy of patriots cannot believe that this great politico-religious sermon that begins with "my brothers" is delivered on behalf of the ideas held by the Front National.

Note: The worst thing about the article by Zerkoun, in my view, is not that it is full of medieval thinking, but that it is not an accurate depiction of Islam. It is closer to a depiction of Christianity. Zerkoun may have tried to convince Marine Le Pen that Christianity and Islam are close. In one passage he claims that Islam is "transmitted from the heart, not with swords and gunpowder."

As of now, I don't know what Marine Le Pen's response was to this and other articles in praise of Islam.

Yesterday (Sunday) I was about to translate and post two of the articles linked above, when I found still another article from Riposte Laïque announcing that Zerkoun had left the FN. We still don't know what he was doing there in the first place. Here is his message to RL:

I would like to clarify a few things with regard to various articles published at your website:

- I left the FN at least three months ago.

- I freed myself from my duties in the Marianne Collective.

- I do not belong to the RBM.

- I am not close to Marine Le Pen.

Note: That he was there at all is troubling, but since he has left, perhaps we can "chalk it up to experience". Maybe Marine Le Pen is not familiar with all those who belong to her party or her coalitions. Maybe when she realized what he was writing and saying she dismissed him. (We don't know exactly the circumstances of his dismissal.) I leave the last word to Riposte Laïque. The following passage is from a longer article (second link above) expressing serious concern over the ideological leaning of the Front National:

(…) Finally, we see that all the articles he sent to Boulevard Voltaire, in which he said he belonged to the FN and in which he supported Islam have disappeared. Let's hope that these exchanges produce the clarification that so many patriots have been waiting for vis-à-vis the position of the Front National on Islam.

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, September 06, 2014

Le Pen rises, Hollande sinks

I've stayed away longer than I planned to, but it was great to get away from the constant effort of reading a computer screen. I'll start with something easy: Marine Le Pen continues to climb in popularity, as François Hollande's rating dips down into the dregs - at about 13%, a new record. From François Desouche:

A poll conducted by IFOP for Le Figaro on September 3 and 4 is undeniable: if the 2017 presidential election were to be held this Sunday, Marine Le Pen would win the first round easily, whoever her adversary on the right was.

"In the second round, and this is a first, the president of the Front National would even beat François Hollande…"

In the first round the best right-wing candidate would be Nicolas Sarkozy with 25% versus 28% for Marine Le Pen. Alain Juppé is close behind with 24% versus 30% for Le Pen. On the left, in the first round, the radical left represented by Jean-Luc Mélenchon would win 10% in any circumstance, or one point less than in 2012. François Hollande would remain between 16 and 17%, far behind…

In the second round, if Marine Le Pen found herself face to face with the current head of the Socialist State, the latter would be beaten easily 46% against 54%. However, if Juppé were to confront the president of the Front National, he would easily win with 64% versus 36%. And if Sarkozy were to face Marine Le Pen he would win by 20 points (60% against 40%). (…)

Note: This is just a poll, and we cannot take it too seriously at this point. But the first round is always crucial. For even if she makes it to the second round, the only candidate she can beat is the dismally unpopular François Hollande. Sarkozy (according to this poll) could actually beat her!

François Hollande has never been so disliked. However, this fact too has to be taken cautiously. The voting public is very fickle and can always throw a curve ball, putting back into office a man who has only contempt for his constituents.

A few days ago Valérie Trierweiler, Hollande's ex-mistress, published a tell-all book that created much excitement at the blogs and social networks. One passage, in particular has been frequently quoted. Le Point explains:

In the end, the portrait of François Hollande seems terrible. We discover a cold-hearted man, totally overtaken by events, calculating, sometimes mean, enclosed in a bubble… The most terrible passage is a scene that takes place during a family dinner. He mocks Valérie's family, of modest origins: "He presented himself as the man who does not like the rich. In reality, the president does not like the poor. He, a man of the left, privately calls them 'the toothless ones', and is proud of his little joke."

Note: His comment refers to the fact that the poor have little access to proper dental care, even in France, land of socialized medicine.

While her book, entitled Merci pour ce moment (Thank you for this moment), is probably no literary masterpiece, the passage cited above reveals one thing about Hollande - he is not just an incompetent nerd, he is a snob, like most ambitious Socialists with repressed competitiveness and no interest in or knowledge of the reality of human nature.

Below, he falls asleep at a NATO meeting.

A group calling themselves Les Sans-Dents (The Toothless Ones) demonstrated on Friday near Elysée Palace. They demanded the resignation of François Hollande in reaction to the remarks about poor people attributed to him by Valérie Trierweiller. Their sign reads, "Toothless? Enough to bite you, Pépère." ("Pépère" is one of his many nicknames.)

Photo from François Desouche.

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

France confronted by Islam - Part 8

In this final section Ayméric Chauprade (above) adds several conditions to his proposals, narrowing down the enemy to one type of Islam, insisting on the need for a Palestinian State and for alliances with "moderate" Sunnis. But he also exposes the truth about the discrepancy in the number of dead Palestinians compared to dead Israelis. And finally he repeats that France can only recover her identity by freeing herself from United States domination.

Parts 1-4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7

A foreign policy in keeping with our internal priorities

Faced with the French identity crisis, our foreign policy decisions will prove determining. An alliance with Russia, the only great European power to openly and firmly assert its Christian civilization, ought to be an obvious choice to any patriot. As should an entente with Shiism and all Middle Eastern minorities confronted with the awakening of the Sunni volcano as it attempts obsessively to reconstitute the Umma in a world Caliphate seeking to expand to the detriment of the other civilizations. I am, moreover, convinced that the United States and Israel will eventually reach an agreement with Iran (including Iran as a nuclear power, as Sunni Pakistan is) and with Shia-dominant Iraq. We must of course also cooperate with the moderate Sunni monarchies of the Arab world, those who do not finance jihad, like Morocco, the UAE, or Kuwait. The war is not against Sunni Islam, it is against the Sunni extremism that is eating away an important part of Sunni Islam, and this nuance is essential because this war must be waged side by side with all moderate Sunni Muslims.

Note: I cannot comment with any authority on his notion of cooperation with "moderate" Sunnis. Nor do I have any knowledge of what an American-Israeli agreement with Iran would mean, except that Iran's nuclear capabilities, assuming they exist, could be used against Sunni extremists, if necessary. Finally what is the relevance of Pakistan here? It all seems very theoretical.

Regarding Israel, France must not yield to the emotional trap, but preserve a balanced policy. When one defends a world based on sovereignty, one also defends the sovereignty of Israel and its right to security. It is nonetheless obvious that the security of Israel can only derive from a fair solution for the Palestinians, which would impose on Israel (as Sharon suggested at the end of his life) the obligation to make painful concessions in the West Bank, hence to dismantle its colonies.

Note: Again, he is very theoretical. Israel has made many concessions to the Palestinians including several offers for a Palestinian State. Israel's very painful disengagement from Gaza in 2005 is the topic of a long Wikipedia page. What makes Chauprade (or anybody else) think that a Palestinian State would appease the Muslims? That they would suddenly stop their attacks and live peacefully side by side with Israelis? Isn't this as quixotic as the French notion of "vivre-ensemble" (living together)?

Below, from Ynet, the last Israeli home demolished as Israel ends the disengagement from Gaza, 2005.

The emotion generated by the drama of the Palestinians is overwhelming some of us, causing us to lose a sense of proportion and to forget the profound causes of the conflict. One argument you hear all the time is that all of this is unjust because Israelis only have fifty (military) deaths while the Palestinians mourn two thousand (essentially civilians). To which I respond with the principle of political responsibility. If I were French Defense Minister and my country were attacked by rockets, then yes I would do everything to keep the French death toll at zero and to inflict the maximum number of losses on my enemy. But then the question arises: Why are Palestinian deaths essentially civilian? Answer: Hamas' combatants emerge from tunnels that they dig in order to shoot rockets on Israel from buildings where families live, then they go back and hide in the tunnels. Israeli aviation and artillery respond, therefore, on the places where the rocket fire originated, namely, the apartment buildings where civilians, whom Hamas has chosen not to protect, reside. So it is clear that Hamas knowingly chooses to sacrifice Palestinian civilians and they do this because they are waging a world war of information based on images and emotions.

A politician worthy of the name, places intelligence ahead of emotion, just as analysis must precede communication, not the contrary. Yes the images of dismembered Palestinian children make me sick. But since 2011, have they shown us images of Christian or Alaouite Syrians massacred by the jihadist rebels armed by Paris, London and Washington? Have they shown us images of Libyan civilians charred in their homes by the NATO airstrikes? Have they shown us images of civilians of Donetsk pulverized by Ukrainian artillery fire?

War is implacable. The Palestinians of Gaza have chosen to give power to a movement, Hamas, whose objective is not to construct a real Palestinian sovereign State next to Israel, but to destroy Israel. Whenever a people put into power a movement with no objective other than the harassment of a military superpower next door, only misfortune can be expected. It's terribly unjust for the civilians who perish, but bad choices cost dearly and we will soon pay dearly for ours if we persist in our soft-heartedness and our strategic errors.

France is at a crossroads. She must - all at the same time - become again a player for multipolar equilibrium by emancipating herself from the United States; support the emergence of a true European power independent of the United States and founded on respect for nations; and confront the identity challenge threatening her which is directly tied to the changing situation in the Middle East, whether one likes it or not. This implies the need for courage not only on the American question, but also on the question of Sunni extremism that is progressing here in France as it prevails in Arab countries one after the other. This courage cannot be expected from a ruling class in large part anesthetized by money from Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Only a great political change will give back to the French their identity, their sovereignty, their influence on the world stage, and their honor. Count on me to participate in this great political change as I will fight with all my strength so that my children and my grand-children may live in a France inhabited by her centuries-old civilization.

Note: As I post, a major shake-up has occurred in France with the resignation of François Hollande's cabinet of ministers, and the refusal of some of the ministers to work in whatever new cabinet he manages to put together. Also, Hollande cut a pathetic and dishonorable figure at the August 25th commemoration of the Liberation, speaking unduly at length beneath the pouring rain (causing jokes about the "ice bucket" president) and making numerous faux pas - one of which was "patrie échouée" which translates "the defeated homeland" or "the homeland wrecked". I'm not sure what he meant to say, but at Twitter they are speaking of a "shipwreck".

I have not had time to read carefully the article from Le Figaro, but a post on the cabinet shake-up will follow as soon as possible.

Note: I suspect, but do not know for sure, that this sudden haste to jump ship stems directly from the pro-Palestinian riots, the massacres of Christians in Iraq, and the violence in Ukraine. Suddenly everybody knows something is wrong! They don't want to be associated with an economic collapse, a possible volcanic rise in street crime and riots, and the obvious takeover by the Islamic State of destabilized Arab countries. It's not impossible that Ayméric Chauprade's dissertation had something to do with this, although that may be a stretch.

(You probably also heard that Qatar bombed Libya.)

Below, François Hollande, incompetence incarnate, both victim and perpetrator of corruption, greed, ignorance and arrogance.

Final note: Regarding this impressive but still theoretical foreign policy proposal from Chauprade, I will take a cautious approach. First, Marine Le Pen has to become president. Second, Chauprade, who has been working closely with the Front National behind the scenes for a number of years, and who has also been adviser to Jean-Marie Le Pen, still has to prove himself in a real-life situation such as a ministerial post, and he may do that, but it cannot be before 2017. Third, he is very close to some Arab countries such as Morocco where he has been a foreign policy adviser. He seems to have inadvertently adopted a little bit of George Bush's idea of getting the "bad guys" and using the "good guys" as our allies. Chauprade sees the only danger to be Sunni fundamentalism, no other form of Islam. In fact, the other branches of Islam will be our allies, in his view.

So we must be cautious. French readers can read a critical article about him at Rue89. (You must be cautious about this article as well.)

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, August 22, 2014

France confronted by Islam - Part 7

Part 7 of an eight-part policy proposal by Aymeric Chauprade, Marine Le Pen's foreign policy adviser. See Parts 1-4 here, Part 5 here and Part 6 here.

Looking squarely at the Islamic problem in France

Let's not allow ourselves to be governed by ideological obsessions. Let's look at reality. History is largely the product of demographic dynamics. My political commitment is first founded on the desire to keep France in her civilization, French civilization itself being a component of European civilization. I defend the French nation, its 1500-year-old civilization just as I defend European civilization. France obviously needs profound economic reforms and probably moral reform, but she is threatened above all by the replacement of her historic population by a population in its majority African and Muslim. This is obvious, and no denial of reality can mask it. Ethnic Frenchmen are little by little being replaced and since assimilation only works for a part of this new non-European population (the part that was willing to assimilate), France is exposed by default to the perspective of no longer being, in one or two decades, what she has been from her origins, namely a nation of European roots and Christian culture. This phenomenon is not limited to France. Other countries of Western Europe are experiencing it and the United States also is seeing its WASP population become a minority.

Now, I am certain that there exists a majority of Frenchmen who do not want to see France lose her civilization and I am certain too that a political majority can be built before 2017 around this idea that Marine Le Pen represents better than anyone. There is no other credible solution than to build this majority with those who have already understood the link between the internal Islamic threat and the external Islamic threat.

From this point of view, the fate of the Christian minorities of the East, a projection into the future of what lies in store for the French in a France that has become predominantly Islamic, and the fate of the Jews of France more and more victims of insults if not violence, ought to help the French people to understand that the unity of France cannot be taken for granted and that great perils weigh on her.

The new antisemitism comes from a part of the Muslim community that associates the Jews with the politics of Israel. The recent pro-Palestinian demonstrations provided ample proof, on the one hand that the Palestinian cause has become an Islamist cause, on the other hand that anti-Zionism no longer even tries to distinguish itself from antisemitism (we even saw in these demonstrations signs referring to Mohamed Merah, the Toulouse killer). Of course, any lucid Frenchman is not fooled by the symmetrical game of the Jewish community, that has its own reasons for victimizing itself in order to sustain the policy of emigration to Israel. But exaggeration and exploitation do not in any way change the implacable reality that the teachers in our national education system have perceived for years now in the classwork of many immigrant pupils. An entire large segment of the French population of Arab/North African and Muslim origin is not only anti-Zionist, it is antisemitic.

Some reproach Marine Le Pen for having defended the Jewish Defense League. They did not understand her position. First of all, Marine Le Pen has always been on the side of freedoms. That was true during the controversy about Dieudonné and it's true today with regard to the JDL. She is not giving her approval to either Dieudonné or the JDL, rather she is on her guard against the inclination for interdicts that can open the way to any other interdict on any other pretext. When a JDL militant stabbed a police officer, the matter was covered up by the left and nobody demanded that the JDL be banned. Suddenly, because the JDL flexed its muscles against the pro-Palestinian militants (including numerous vandals), it must be banned? The truth is that the JDL is nothing more than the reflection of a self-defensive posture on the part of a community that feels less and less safe in France, as do millions of other Frenchmen who are attacked by thugs. That's the question we should be asking ourselves! Marine Le Pen spoke, once again, in favor of freedom and security, two central themes of her political platform.

Below, from August 1, 2014, Marine Le Pen explains the presence of the JDL in France. (There may be commercials.)

Marine Le Pen justifie à demi-mot l'existence... by ERTV

- Is the government justified in considering banning the JDL that we saw in recent weeks during the street demonstrations?

 - First I want to say that if there is a Jewish Defense League it is because there is a certain number of Jews who feel unsafe. They have the feeling that a new antisemitism is growing in France and that it is the result of ethnic confrontations. It's a reality. You have to say it, because if you don't say it, you are covering up a part of what is happening in France. Now, if the Jewish Defense League increases its violent actions, it has to be dissolved. But the State also has to assume its responsibilities and ensure the safety of our Jewish compatriots. I am not certain that the State can do this, I am even convinced of the opposite, and the clear, most striking proof of this is the way the State is incapable of maintaining order when there is the slightest demonstration. Once again we saw that the police had been ordered not to intervene and to allow gangs to vandalize, burn and assault; gangs who are now accustomed to using the streets of France as their playground. 

Chauprade goes on:

Barring a political change of great magnitude, French Jews can be concerned about their future in France as neither the UMP nor the PS constitute a rampart of protection. Besides being bought out by Qatar and Saudi Arabia, our leaders of the UMP and the PS have cynically chosen the demographic weight of the Muslim voters. This explains the facility with which the Muslim community takes what it wants (large mosques, multiple violations of laïcité…) from the UMP and PS municipalities. It also explains the propagation of the mandatory "pro-Palestinian" line of thought in the main-stream media. These cowardly politicians of the UMPS, who always obeyed the one who spoke the loudest, thought at one time that "the Jews were powerful" and closed their eyes to the fate of Palestinian children, but today first they sense the growing isolation of Israel, second they can almost "touch" the money from the Gulf, and third they measure the importance of their Muslim clients in France, so they can call themselves pro-Palestinian, without running much of a risk. But I will not be among those who yield to the emotional strings pulled in the information war, used in the past against Iraq or Serbia to justify the bombings of Baghdad and Belgrade, and mobilized today against Russia with regard to Ukraine as they are against Israel with regard to the Palestinians. A Frenchman must keep his head and learn how to analyze the causes and underpinnings of a war by detaching himself from the horrible images he sees. It is because we aspire to govern both responsibly and courageously that we must learn to free ourselves from the double trap of immediacy and of emotions.

Our country has welcomed millions of Muslims. Some will stay, others will have to leave. This great separation between those destined to stay and those who will have to leave our land will revolve around international issues. It's the reason why, more than ever, a political program of national recovery must offer us clear and coherent international choices.

Note: It is rare for a prominent analyst to talk about Muslims leaving the country. Chauprade says they will have to leave. Can we assume that Marine Le Pen would institute a policy of "assimilate or leave"? And what will happen if they refuse to assimilate and refuse to leave as well? He goes on:

Those Sunni Muslims who assimilate will choose to integrate themselves into the heritage of Christian France with separation of Church and State and to accept the fact that their Jewish compatriots love Israel as they themselves love the land of their ancestors: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia.

Note: Is this just another pipe dream, comparable to any that Woodrow Wilson, with his League of Nations or George Bush, with his Democracy for Iraq, entertained, or is it a realistic possibility? He does not suggest that Muslims convert, but that they accept to live under laws that are not in keeping with sharia. How many would? 

The others (they are numerous) who choose the Umma instead of France, who veil their wives and daughters, who wear the salafist beard, will not have any desire to be or to remain French. The energetic refusal of Islamization (by refusing to build mosques and by rejecting the integration of Islamic regulations into our own customs), as well as a profound reform in the accessibility of welfare will be the two strong political choices that will create the conditions for the repatriation of those who do not choose to love France.

Note: Like Marine Le Pen, he is advocating a "shape up or ship out" policy. Thirty or forty years ago it might have been this simple, but now… With Russia's help it might be possible, but how could it be non-violent, considering the huge stake the Arab countries have in France and the new role played by the U.S. as builder of Islamic States and destroyer of Christian populations?

On Obama's reaction to Islamic terrorism see Pamela Geller.

Personally, I do not believe in zero immigration. Neither practically, nor morally. Not practically because the cultural influence of France includes the possibility for serious students all over the world to pursue studies of French in France. Not morally because I do not see on what basis we should be condemned to take in those who poison our lives and turn away those who might contribute to France. I believe, on the contrary, in the reversal of the "bad" migratory waves. And I believe that the solution includes the establishment of the right of blood, the abolition of family reunification laws, a drastic reduction in asylum (with civilizational preferences, such as the Christians of Iraq or the Copts of Egypt…) and an immigration policy of choice (choosing those who contribute to France).

Note: Since this section was so long, I'm letting it go without further comment or relevant links. It poses as many questions as it answers. Chauprade's discourse is well-founded, rational, patriotic, almost inspirational, but at times quixotic. There are so many dangers Marine Le Pen will have to confront, not the least of which is hostility from the combined forces of the E.U., the U.S.A., and the many who hate her in her own country… Of course, none of this means anything if she is not elected in 2017.

Below, the Battle of Poitiers, led by Charles Martel, with a passage from Christian History. It took superhuman physical force to defeat the Saracens then. Today it is much more difficult because they are entrenched in the Western countries, and protected by the illegitimate policies of superpowers. The real superpower - the pathetically misinformed people - are recoiling, refusing to avert the catastrophe that lies ahead.

The Franks, clothed in leather and steel, their fair hair streaming below their helmets, were armed with spears, battle-axes and great two-edged swords, and drawn up as a solid phalanx ranged shoulder to shoulder, shield to shield. “The men of the north stood motionless like a wall of ice,” writes the awestricken chronicler Isidore of Beja. All day long, as wave after wave of Muslim cavalry crashed against them, they hacked and slashed down men and horses until the road and surrounding fields were choked with corpses.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Monday, August 18, 2014

France confronted by Islam - Part 6

Here is Part 6 of the eight-part policy proposal by Aymeric Chauprade (photo below). See Part 5 here and Parts 1-4 here.

Know your enemy

I'm addressing those capable of looking reality in the face and who can, therefore, overcome their reflexes and ideological heritage. One of the great challenges of politics has to do with the capacity to adapt to changing circumstances in order to remain oneself. During the Cold War, I was anti-Communist, hence anti-Soviet and favorable to the alliance with the United States. Today I defend the independence of France and of Europe against the United States and consequently I regard Russia as a necessary strategic partner, insofar as it is defending the fundamentals of Christian civilization. When the Kings of France shifted their alliances (towards Austria under Louis XV), public opinion did not understand, so ingrained in the popular consciousness was the habit of hating an age-old enemy.

My political positions are not and will never be determined by my personal friendships, and I know even today that some of my pro-Palestinian friends will have trouble understanding them. I know all the Arab countries, I was even for a longtime a consultant for an Arab Kingdom, and I have never been to Israel. I have a personal history with the Arab world and the positions I endorse take a toll emotionally, but it's the duty of anyone who aspires to govern behind Marine Le Pen to think only of the higher interests of the country. For a true French patriot must be capable of prioritizing the dangers that threaten France, of refusing ideology and simplistic intellectual constructions that designate an imaginary globalist enemy against which we might have to lead a world-wide revolution. Israel is not the enemy of France. France today has but one veritable enemy: Sunni fundamentalism. It's true that Israel today still has close ties to the United States, but the U.S. is beginning to turn away and Israel is adopting a multipolar position, establishing strong relations with Russia, India, China. Therefore, unless he is ruled by obsessive antisemitism, a French patriot cannot seek to form, against Israel, an alliance that is both against nature and politically useless with the pro-Palestinian extreme-left, the scum in the suburban ghettos and the Islamists.

Some will object that Israel has done everything to create this situation that has led to the replacement of the original Palestinian nationalism by Hamas, all to reenforce the cohesion of the West around the Jewish State. It's possible (remember that Sheikh Yassin was in fact brought back to Palestine by the Israelis to be a counterweight to Arafat), but if this is the case, the strategy worked and the Europeans of the West now find themselves in the same boat as the Israelis. Consequently, I am not going to wait for my country to be repopulated by a radicalized Muslim majority bent on unleashing a Revolution against a nationless Capitalism! I have but one imperious priority - the French people, and my political combat does not revolve around the fight against Zionism!

Note: He is still reserved about his identity. Is he an ethnic Frenchman? His close ties with and deep knowledge of the Arab countries indicate he has much more than a passing acquaintance with the Middle East. References to his personal life are vague, but he implies he has lost friends because he is not anti-Israel.

His rejection (and Marine Le Pen's) of the United States is perfectly understandable, considering what we have become. I only wish he would point out that the U.S. today bears little resemblance to pre-1968 America. Many of the political issues are the same, but the unmistakable decline in the quality of education and popular culture and the concomitant prevalence of the anti-racist ideology, combined with leaders that are fundamentally anti-American and pro-Islam, have turned us into a country that more closely resembles Socialist France than the America that landed on the beaches of Normandy. It is not likely we will get our bearings in the near future, considering there is no strong committed opposition party here.

I have not had time to read all of his recent writings. Therefore, I don't know if he still espouses the notion that 9/11 was a deliberate attempt by Bush and Israel to trigger a war with the Muslims. In Part 1 he spoke of a "probable" collusion between two "deep states" - that of the U.S. and that of Saudi Arabia. Possibly he is trying to find a theory he is comfortable with.

Both Chauprade and Marine Le Pen are working assiduously towards an alliance with Russia and both denounce the hostility of the French media towards Vladimir Putin. There are numerous French-language article online about their efforts.

Note also that Chauprade never speaks of the Shiites, only the Sunnis. For him, apparently, the threat of Sunni Islam far outweighs the other variety. Yet was it not Hezbollah, a predominantly Shiite terrorist group, that bombed the Beirut barracks in 1983 killing 58 French paratroopers and over 200 U.S. Marines?

Below, Marine Le Pen in Russia.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Friday, August 15, 2014

France confronted by Islam - Part 5

Here is Part 5 of the eight-part article by Aymeric Chauprade. See Parts 1-4 here.

Coming face to face with the corruption of French politics and the French economy by Qatar and Saudi Arabia

The origin of this catastrophe, it can never be repeated often enough, is quite simply that beginning with the Sarkozy presidency, France placed its Arab policy completely in the hands of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and its diplomacy became, de facto, the primary sub-contractor of these two Islamist powers.

Libya was the war of sub-contracted Qatari interests par excellence. The calculation of the Western powers (United States and its aligned European forces) was as follows: add to Qatar (possessor of the world's second largest gas reserve, after Russia) the formidable gas potential of Libya, and crush in this way (in addition to American shale gas) the dependency of the European Union on Russian gas. Now there's a strange strategic vision: that of preferring, in the long term, to be dependent on "fundamentalist" gas rather than Russian gas!

Note: Those interested in the topic of Qatari natural gas and the great Qatari ambition to build a pipeline through Turkey, can consult this long article from Zero Hedge. I cannot vouch for its accuracy, but it seems to contain much relevant information.

Ever since the assassination of Qadhafi (October 20, 2011), backed by the pro-American West after the violation of promises made to Russia (to respect the no-fly zone and not to destroy the regime), the result of the Libyan operation was not long in coming. In early 2013, France would intervene militarily in Mali to stem the rapid advances by the friends of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and in July of that year, the U.N., Washington and the near-totality of Western countries decided to close their consulates and to evacuate their personnel.

Note: The above paragraph compresses into a few lines a world of information. Russia was severely critical of the murder of Qadhafi, and of its extraordinary brutality that was publicized world-wide for all to see. Mrs. Clinton supposedly laughed when she heard the news. The preposterous high hopes for a better Libya were soon in shambles. Qadhafi was an evil man who committed crimes, but there is always someone more evil. In Libya, the French were children playing with firearms - Sarkozy employed the services of the idiot intellectual impostor Bernard-Henri Lévy (above with his Islamist friends), whose addiction to military intervention, whose hatred of traditional France, whose preference for Islam are well-known, and who dragged the country into the ludicrous cesspit. BHL has had little to say about Libya of late. But as Chauprade says, the buck stops with Sarkozy:

One can never adequately reiterate the extent to which the Libyan chaos was first the responsibility of Sarkozy and at least as much that of Alain Juppé who was presented as an old "wise man". As early as 2011, I predicted that the pillage of weapons depots in Libya by Islamist tribes and militia would lead to a chaotic situation comparable to that in Iraq in 2003, when the Americans chose to destroy the Sunni structure of the Iraqi State that would constitute the embryo of what is today…the Islamic State.

As if that weren't enough for their incompetence and their arrogance, Sarkozy and Juppé added the Syrian error to the Libyan error, once again inspired (commanded?) by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Hollande (who apparently wanted a war of his own, like Sarkozy) had only to push deeper and deeper into his predecessors' errors. France was ahead of everyone in its desire to lead the West to war against Bachar el Assad, to the point of looking ridiculous, when the United States, more pragmatic, finally reached an agreement with the Russians.

Shaking hands with the Devil always has a high price. This submission of our diplomatic choices to Doha and Riyad is more than an external mistake, it is an internal crime. But this crime has an explanation: many key persons of the UMP and the PS have been bought by Gulf money, which explains why Sarkozy exempted Qatari investments from taxation and allowed Qatar to have a financial stake in several large strategic French companies. It also  explains why Qatar proposed to the former French president that he head a Qatari investment fund. Hollande himself did nothing to stop Qatar's policy of penetration; he simply redirected the cursor towards Saudi Arabia. It must be said that Saudi Arabia weighs in the balance-sheets of many large French enterprises (arms, construction, luxury items…) and is going to invest fifteen billion euros in le Grand Paris. I won't review here the extended catalog of the penetration of Saudi and Qatari money in our industries, our banks, our suburbs… Look at someone like Dominique de Villepin who today adopts a Gaullist tone in his criticism of Israel, but who was a fervent partisan of the intervention against Qadhafi probably because he is a licensed attorney of Qatar. Was he not the one who, having failed to become the UMP presidential candidate, tried to become the standard-bearer of the young Muslims in the ghettos?

Note: Le Grand Paris is a wildly anti-traditionalist project that aims to extend the boundaries of Paris almost to the Atlantic Ocean. This would make the suburban ghettos part of the Parisian municipality, presumably in order to correct "territorial inequalities". A long English-language article at France Today provides the basic information about this extravagant boondoggle that would sweep away parts of the ancient French countryside.

Note: Dominique de Villepin, born in 1953 in Rabat, Morocco, was Prime Minister from 2005-2007 under Jacques Chirac. He had been Foreign Minister during the debate on our plans to enter Iraq, and delivered an impassioned speech in the U.N. Security Council against intervention. Sympathetic to the Islamic countries he insisted the term "war against terror" was "improper". Would he have preferred "war against Islam"?

While our media feature cover stories on so-called "Russian agents" in France (…), they close their eyes to the millions of euros that pour into the UMP and Socialist parties and the institutes of international relations, almost all of which have become pro-Gulf, hence anti-Iran, anti-Syria, and anti-Russia, but favorable to the integration of Turkey (into the E.U.). In this context it is easier to understand the "one-way thinking" against Israel that is firmly established in these subsidized milieus. Israel, having lost the image war (and how could it win with pictures of Palestinian children blown to bits?), it is no longer very risky to criticize Israel on the nightly television news.

For the UMPS system and its subsidized "experts", the double alliance with the Muslims of France and money from the Gulf is a boon: a double jackpot because they pocket the money from the Gulf at the same time that they win the Muslim vote.

Note: If you did not read Soeren Kern's analysis of the French intervention in Libya when it was posted in March 2011, read it now. It is an accurate description of the blunderer Sarkozy and the man who knew too much about African immigration, Moammar Qadhafi (or Gaddafi, as many journalists spell it.) An excellent synopsis.

Top: A young anti-Qadhafi insurgent makes the victory sign as French aircraft bomb Qadhafi's tanks. The photo is from Le Figaro March 20, 2011.

Below, Libya today in the throes of extreme violence as the power struggle goes on. This time it seems we got our diplomatic personnel out (of Tripoli) in time. From Le Figaro July 27, 2014.

Note: Whatever France did in Benghazi, it was no match for our evil refusal to send help to our ambassadors who were begging for assistance and who paid with their lives the haughty indifference of both Obama and Mrs. Clinton who, besides the issue of not sending assistance, could not admit that the peaceful democratic revolutionaries they supported were really ferocious barbarians of the most unappeasable sort. 

On lack of adequate protection for our people in Benghazi see New Media Journal. There is much online about this act of treason and incompetence.

Below, the American Embassy in Benghazi in September 2012.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,